-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Good day, gentlemen. Has anyone noticed a striking change in Dragon magazine?
- Thread starter Zogg
- Start date
Bulsarra
First Post
As a fairly consistant reader of Dragon since around 1981, I'll just say that I enjoy Dragon as much now as I ever have.
The only thing you said I agree with concerned the stories, though I seem to recall Paizo saying that they're aiming for big name authors for stories now so perhaps they'll be more infrequent.
The thing I really like about Dragon is the gaming content is more broad and there's a load more stuff I can use. I don't care about the covers that much...fantasy art is hit-or-miss with me no matter how good others think it is.
The main thing I'm failing to see in your post is any constructive criticism. Magazines have to make changes or they'll go under. If you don't like the changes then quit reading, there are a massive number of gaming sites out there and most of them rehash what's in Dragon anyway. Perhaps you could contribute content to those sites you feel is more relevant to D&D rather than trolling for complaints against Dragon. At least your time would be better spent.
The only thing you said I agree with concerned the stories, though I seem to recall Paizo saying that they're aiming for big name authors for stories now so perhaps they'll be more infrequent.
The thing I really like about Dragon is the gaming content is more broad and there's a load more stuff I can use. I don't care about the covers that much...fantasy art is hit-or-miss with me no matter how good others think it is.
The main thing I'm failing to see in your post is any constructive criticism. Magazines have to make changes or they'll go under. If you don't like the changes then quit reading, there are a massive number of gaming sites out there and most of them rehash what's in Dragon anyway. Perhaps you could contribute content to those sites you feel is more relevant to D&D rather than trolling for complaints against Dragon. At least your time would be better spent.
Darrin Drader
Explorer
For what its worth, while I support the magazine, I have hated almost every cover since the release of 3E. I would much rather see cool fantasy scenes by good artists rather than character poses on every cover.
Just my .02. Otherwise I think they're doing as good a job as they can reasonably be expected to do.
Just my .02. Otherwise I think they're doing as good a job as they can reasonably be expected to do.
Re: Re: Good day, gentlemen. Has anyone noticed a striking change in Dragon magazine?
What exactly was offensive about my first post? I understand I should probably email Eric and get the specifics, but I would say my first post was no harsher than MANY posts on here that criticize the 3.5E ranger, for instance. I also wasn't offending anyone, but rather a concept or presentation.
Furthermore, I backed up my criticism with examples and lengthy descriptions. Perhaps my language was a bit "colorful" - though really it was just an attempt to show my passion for what "once was".
Finally I recognize that this re-post is a bit snide - and I apologize to Eric for my impudence (I don't want to undermine his authority even if I disagree with it) - but for those of you who were offended by the first post that had nothing to do with you, I whole-heartedly state:
Get over yourselves.
alsih2o said:
What exactly was offensive about my first post? I understand I should probably email Eric and get the specifics, but I would say my first post was no harsher than MANY posts on here that criticize the 3.5E ranger, for instance. I also wasn't offending anyone, but rather a concept or presentation.
Furthermore, I backed up my criticism with examples and lengthy descriptions. Perhaps my language was a bit "colorful" - though really it was just an attempt to show my passion for what "once was".
Finally I recognize that this re-post is a bit snide - and I apologize to Eric for my impudence (I don't want to undermine his authority even if I disagree with it) - but for those of you who were offended by the first post that had nothing to do with you, I whole-heartedly state:
Get over yourselves.
BryonD
Hero
Zogg said:
Am I the only one that finds this sentence REALLY ironic?
Anyway, Dragon is fine.
In my mind Paizo can be simplified to 3 charactertics:
A) They make a fine quality Dragon Magazine, whose content I am interested in and enjoy.
B) They make a fine quality Dungeon/Poly Magazine, whose post-Poly content I am not interested in. This makes me a bad person in their eyes.
c) They have employees that put forward an anti-professional web presence. (Though they are far less rude than either the lead post in this thread or the former version)
Dragon, like any magazine, is up and down from issue to issue. And old Dragon did not have to maintain visibility against an entire OGL D&D support industry.
Arnwyn
First Post
I didn't find your first post "offensive" at all (though it can be noted that ENWorld can be a bit oversensitive at times)... but that's neither here nor there.
I do agree with some of your statements, and disagree with others:
I do agree about the covers, and the horrible blurbs on them. This has to do with selling it on the newstand. It's sort of the "everyone else does it, so we have to as well" idea. I think that they have a skewed idea on the makeup of the target market, but that's just IMO. (Thankfully, though, I don't use the covers for my gaming, so I've successfully ignored the covers completely. Having a subscription helps.)
I don't know what you mean by "cool, reserved font".
For the short stories, it seems Paizo is torn. There seems to be two camps that either like 'em or hate 'em. IMO, I think they are doing a *very* good job walking the fine line between the two camps. A very good job, indeed.
"Sage advice" is still included, most of the time. No problems there.
While the content has certainly been bumpy (for example, if on the rare occasion there's ever a map, it's never gridded or "complete"), it's still decent enough for me to keep my subscription. I'm still amazed at the April issue of this year. I could use EVERY SINGLE ARTICLE in that issue. Wow. More issues like April 2003, please!
I do agree with some of your statements, and disagree with others:
I do agree about the covers, and the horrible blurbs on them. This has to do with selling it on the newstand. It's sort of the "everyone else does it, so we have to as well" idea. I think that they have a skewed idea on the makeup of the target market, but that's just IMO. (Thankfully, though, I don't use the covers for my gaming, so I've successfully ignored the covers completely. Having a subscription helps.)
I don't know what you mean by "cool, reserved font".
For the short stories, it seems Paizo is torn. There seems to be two camps that either like 'em or hate 'em. IMO, I think they are doing a *very* good job walking the fine line between the two camps. A very good job, indeed.
"Sage advice" is still included, most of the time. No problems there.
While the content has certainly been bumpy (for example, if on the rare occasion there's ever a map, it's never gridded or "complete"), it's still decent enough for me to keep my subscription. I'm still amazed at the April issue of this year. I could use EVERY SINGLE ARTICLE in that issue. Wow. More issues like April 2003, please!
alsih2o
First Post
Re: Re: Re: Good day, gentlemen. Has anyone noticed a striking change in Dragon magazine?
an attempt to sidestep the agreed upon rules of the boards.
also, the tone. i come here for a certain set of friends, info and ideas. along with this comes a mood many on the boards strive for, anyone who posts rabid sounding comments and vague criticisms tends to offend me.
and it is not "getting over ourselves" that is required, but an understanding and respect for the rules. these cannot be gotten over.
from the rules summary- "Keep it civil: Don't engage in personal attacks, name-calling, or blanket
generalizations in your discussions. Say how you feel or what you think, but
be careful about ascribing motives to the actions of others or telling others
how they "should" think. People seeking to engage and discuss will find themselves
asking questions, seeking clarifications, and describing their own opinion.
People seeking to "win an argument" sometimes end up taking cheap shots, calling
people names, and generally trying to indimidate others. My advice: don't try
to win. "
Zogg said:
an attempt to sidestep the agreed upon rules of the boards.
also, the tone. i come here for a certain set of friends, info and ideas. along with this comes a mood many on the boards strive for, anyone who posts rabid sounding comments and vague criticisms tends to offend me.
and it is not "getting over ourselves" that is required, but an understanding and respect for the rules. these cannot be gotten over.
from the rules summary- "Keep it civil: Don't engage in personal attacks, name-calling, or blanket
generalizations in your discussions. Say how you feel or what you think, but
be careful about ascribing motives to the actions of others or telling others
how they "should" think. People seeking to engage and discuss will find themselves
asking questions, seeking clarifications, and describing their own opinion.
People seeking to "win an argument" sometimes end up taking cheap shots, calling
people names, and generally trying to indimidate others. My advice: don't try
to win. "
Last edited:
Mordane76
First Post
In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't appear that the art is hurting Dragon. They've been doing business now for 25+ years, so there is at least a survivable number of people purchasing the magazine.
The content is still good, but it's not everyone's taste. I won't even try to say I like EVERYTHING I read in Dragon; there are issues I find nothing of use whatsoever, but there is enough in the magazine as an entity that I continue to give them my cash.
So -- maybe you should take your own advice: Get over yourself. It's not like Paizo is beating you over the head and taking your money. If you don't like the magazine, don't support it. Or -- better yet, instead of ranting about it here, write Paizo and inform them of your concerns. I'm sure, if enough concerned readership writes them about their art and content, they'll make changes to accomodate their audience. But if they don't know what you (or the audience) think is broken, then they won't fix it, especially if subscriptions and rack sales hold steady or increase.
The content is still good, but it's not everyone's taste. I won't even try to say I like EVERYTHING I read in Dragon; there are issues I find nothing of use whatsoever, but there is enough in the magazine as an entity that I continue to give them my cash.
So -- maybe you should take your own advice: Get over yourself. It's not like Paizo is beating you over the head and taking your money. If you don't like the magazine, don't support it. Or -- better yet, instead of ranting about it here, write Paizo and inform them of your concerns. I'm sure, if enough concerned readership writes them about their art and content, they'll make changes to accomodate their audience. But if they don't know what you (or the audience) think is broken, then they won't fix it, especially if subscriptions and rack sales hold steady or increase.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Good day, gentlemen. Has anyone noticed a striking change in Dragon magazine?
Well it looks like we have a opposing alignments, to say the least. And I hate to break it to you, but many of your friends are pretty rabid and vague at times too - though not surprisingly I will have to contest your claims. I'd replace "rabid" with "passionate" and "vague" with "well-referenced".
I agree that a modicum of civility can really enhance the environment of a message board - and no doubt ENworld has a very well-oiled board with many bright, astute posters. But oversensitivity and political-correctness can ALSO kill the proliferation of a message board. Let's just make sure we don't go around calling "wolf", ok?
alsih2o said:
Well it looks like we have a opposing alignments, to say the least. And I hate to break it to you, but many of your friends are pretty rabid and vague at times too - though not surprisingly I will have to contest your claims. I'd replace "rabid" with "passionate" and "vague" with "well-referenced".
I agree that a modicum of civility can really enhance the environment of a message board - and no doubt ENworld has a very well-oiled board with many bright, astute posters. But oversensitivity and political-correctness can ALSO kill the proliferation of a message board. Let's just make sure we don't go around calling "wolf", ok?
